austria before world war ii was known as the empire of austria-hungry
this was solved by the invasion of turkey
turkey is a delicious country, especially on thanksgiving day, which is the day turkey was able to remove the hungry part of the austro-hungryian empire
He said the balloon was then seen lying partially-inflated above a paddock "like a white Uluru".
what's a paddock?
and what is with the reference to an albino version of a star trek character?
i know you australians typically speak german like your neighbors to the north, but if you are going to write a story in the american language, try to more precise
where the mechanic absconds with jerry's car because jerry wasn't taking good care of it?
the job of the IT admin is to do whatever the hell the OWNERS of a network decide to do with it. if the owners of a network want to give out all the user names and passwords, then that's their call. in what position do you believe the it admin is in to question that?
otherwise, you have some sort of psychotic attachment to your network, you have boundary issues, just like that psychotic mechanic in the seinfeld episode
terry childs is obviously guilty to anyone who isn't a psychotic it admin
ip law doesn't reward inventors. ip law rewards assholes with big pockets. as this case shows, ip law is a farce, its a way for big companies to waste a lot of money on lawyer whores
if you are the little guy who thinks that copyright is for authors, and patents are for inventors, you're a fool
ip law is for distributors and large corporations. real creators are screwed. stop being naive
in the name of the highest ideals of western democracy, fuck ip law, it should be actively undermined and destroyed by anyone with morality and principles. we can't work through our governments and legislators, they're all whores to the patronage system. its up to the common man to destroy the entire rotten edifice
i'm not talking about revolution or any such nonsense. i'm talking about piracy. i'm talking about hitting them in their wallets. with any luck, we can bankrupt the organizations that profit from the idea of "intellectual property", and thereby destroy the validity of the idea itself in anyone's eyes
everything we say do and think is built on the bones of our ancestors
in that respect, if you talk about anything being original, what you really mean is it "significantly expands" upon existing work
human culture science and thought are all branches on a tree. and like any tree, some tiny twigs turn into mighty trunks that in turn support their own twigs, while other twigs fail to thrive or break and fall off
the tree of memes is the same as the tree of genes: constant innovation, most of it misguided, but a spare few leading to the next big thing
nothing is ever original. all you can ever do is expand on what came before, and that is all you should ever aim to do in your life. but don't fool yourself: if it wasn't for who came before you and what they did, what you do would be impossible to do
note i am not excusing the losers who only imitate or coopt someone else's work as their own. but sometimes, good ideas are forgotten, and it takes someone to rediscover them and, on their own, discover they are important (and don't deserve to be forgotten) and to then shout about them to gain the prominence those forgotten or muted ideas deserve
and while this kind of copying is not as noble as original discovery, it is just as important and just as valid a way to contribute to the world. this applies to culture and science. is darwin less of a thinker because he reimagined and remixed the idea of evolution that was already realized but not as expounded upon by many others before him and many of his contemporaries? sometimes, who gets attributed for an idea many others have already realized is simply because they are the ones who first shouted about it the loudest, and then, because of thwm, the idea catches on like wildfire, even though they themselves weren't original in the strictest sense of the word
is gore verbinski less of a moviemaker because he reimagined the japanese "ringu" as "the ring" (which some say is superior to the original)?
is hideo nakata less of a storyteller because he only made a movie of koji suzuki's book (but he popularized it globally because he made such a scary good movie)?
and is koji suzuki just a hack writer because he took some medieval japanese folklore and a canadian film and remixed it as ringu (but of course, it was his contribution to remix like this, and add the idea of a vhs tape, modern technology, being a ghost's manifestation (which is also an idea that has also been explored by others))?
Once there was a beautiful servant named Okiku. She worked for the samurai Aoyama Tessan. Okiku often refused his amorous advances, so he tricked her into believing that she had carelessly lost one of the family's ten precious delft plates. Such a crime would normally result in her death. In a frenzy, she counted and recounted the nine plates many times. However, she could not find the tenth and went to Aoyama in guilty tears. The samurai offered to overlook the matter if she finally became his lover, but again she refused. Enraged, Aoyama threw her down a well to her death. It is said that Okiku became a vengeful spirit who tormented her murderer by counting to nine and then making a terrible shriek to represent the missing tenth plate - or perhaps she was tormented herself and still trying to find the tenth plate but crying out in agony when she never could. In some versions of the story, this torment continued until an exorcist or neighbor shouted "ten" in a loud voice at the end of her count. Her ghost, finally relieved that someone had found the plate for her, haunted the samurai no more.
i mean, you can't review a movie at all without giving SOMETHING away, but if you want your iron man 2 experience to be spotless, you already know not to read any reviews at all
me personally, i read lots of reviews and don't mind anything being "spoiled." in fact, many times i purposefully read the wikipedia entry for a movie to get the entire plot in my head before i see the movie. because unless you are talking about "the crying game", plot points aren't really the issue in terms of your experience being ruined. the single biggest destroyer of movie enjoyment is: expectations. movies you expect a lot from disappoint more easily. simple as that
so here goes:
!!!!!!!!
SPOILER WARNING FOR ANY SEQUEL YOU WILL EVER SEE
!!!!!!!!
1. you enjoyed the first iron man a lot, 2. so you look forward to the second iron man a lot, 3. therefore you will not be as impressed by the second iron man
with that in mind, try to enjoy iron man 2, realizing that the psychology of pleasure (anticipation more influential than delivery) means you are your own worse enemy in the entirety of your lifetime of moviegoing experiences. this lesson applies to all other experiences in your life you do for pleasure to: from going to a restaurant, to buying a car, food, to sex. there's a good reason why women tease, whether they realize it or not: the buildup of anticipation drives your pleasure more than the actual mechanical act of sex
understand psychology, master the pleasure you derive from life
let ie6 only access the intranet and the applications inside the company it is needed for
you don't even have to inspect packets for HTTP_USER_AGENT, no such filtering or gatekeeping nonsense at a network level: since you control the employee's desktop, just lock ie6 out programmatically. lock it down by subnet filter and make the property read only so savvier employees can't change it. employees get used to using two browsers: one for outside access, one for legacy apps
thus you decouple the legacy app argument from the security argument. win win. now you can keep ie6 inhouse for years if you have to. just don't let it peek outside
off the top of my head: in game advertisements, $ for premium or personalized content, subscriptions to online access arenas, etc
in the early 90s, id gave away its first free levels. id made millions because they hooked people on their content, then they charged for more premium content. from this ancient era of videogames, you can see free files is a superior approach, and in fact, not a very revolutionary one
the idea of giving away your product for free for great market share and capitalizing in alternative ways is a story as old as capitalism itself. trying to control that which you cannot control, the internet, emanwhile, is a loser's game, an act of insecurity that simply hurts your bottom line in the new world of media distribution
look: when lots of people consume your media, you have gained power. this power can be capitalized on in all sorts of ways. that's the beginning and the end of all you need to know about the future of media
it is to your advantage to give your media away, to maximize the mindshare, the eyeballs you have control over now. if you charge for your media meanwhile, you simply lessen the amount of copies of your media that is out there, and therefore the ancillary ways in which you can profit
he ignored ip law and was very successful for doing that: he succeeded on merit alone
you point out he then formed gnarls barkley and went on to even more success. this is the old model, where success is determined by getting the fickle attention of a distributor who then hypes you. danger mouse's novelty is only the unorthodox way in which he garnished attention. his story is a hybrid of the old and new model of music distribution. its a temporary phase
the future is the first part of danger mouse's story, and the second part, the amplification by old school distributors, is still going to continue (pop music will never die), but how you make money will be concert venues only. there's still plenty of money there, no need to (mpossibly) control the internet to make money off of media files. in fact, it is superior to give otu the files for free: they are just advertising for your concert gigs: what consumer wants to buy advertising?
"Discarding it for nothing is short sighted at best, and at worst exploitive of artists."
this is absolutely hilarious because the pre-internet model of music distribution is one giant litany of artist explotation. no barrier between consumer and artist, ie, distribution via the internet, is the most artist-empowering reveletation possible
you, like many people, are confusing the death of the middle man with the death of the artist, for some erroneous reason
and it isn't really that revolutionary: its the same business model as broadcast television or radio
content is free, and money is made via ancillary revenue streams. you give your music or movies away for free on the internet and you make cash from the people who show up at concert gigs (because they like your music: your mp3 files are merely advertising) or in the cinema house (the internet, like television and the vcr before it, despite all the panic, is not going to kill the cinema house)
furthermore, this "radical" future is not the death of capitalism, it is the ultimate expression of capitalism: the marketplace, the internet, is a great equalizer. quality and quality alone becomes the dominant determinant about who triumphs and who has to keep their day job. the only people who suffer are the old media companies from the previous, now dead, era of vinyl and cellulose: they aren't needed anymore
and don't believe their lies: when such dying distributors whine about capitalism, they actually are talking about corporatism. corporatism is a greater enemy of capitalism than communism or socialism ever can be, and this is also historically true: oligopolies and monopolies using their size and influence over legislators to warp and destroy the free market to their advantage. so if you are interested in a free market, a marketplace of competing equals, you are interested in strong government regulations which curtail the influence of the dominant players
but this simple truth is unfortunately contrary to so much libertarian and tea party rhetoric
on the topic of foss, and also on many other topical issues, too many people confuse the idea of capitalism and corporatism
too many people unfortunately buy the self-serving rhetoric and the propaganda and the alligator tears of the 800 pound gorillas in the room who say they are on the side of capitalism, but who are not interested in true capitalism at all, they are in corporatism. they are interested in destroying the free market to their advantage by doing away with regulations or flat out rewriting the regulations to grandfather themselves into dominant positions in the marketplace
are you a libertarian? are you a free market fundamentalist? are you a tea party member? then recognize this: your greatest enemy is not the government, it is large corporations. they will destroy the free market UNLESS the government is strong enough to check their power so the little guys can compete equally. the government is the enemy ONLY to the extent that large corporations have corrupted it. so fight to CHANGE the government, not destroy it, for that is far worse in the name of YOUR ideals. IN THE NAME OF THE FREE MARKET, you want and need a strong regulatory government. this really is 100% the truth. a truly free market functions only amongst equals. and since in a marketplace no one stays equal very long, you must have strong regulations to make sure the larger players don't take advantage of the smaller players. there's simply no way around that
so in the name of true capitalism, defy the mpaa and riaa. monopolies and oligopolies are the greatest threat to capitalism, ever
the differences you cite aren't really differences. everything is a means to an end, including music and movies: pleasure. "You install it because you want to do something with it" applies to linux. it also applies to "iron man" and beyonce
put it this way: a hammer is not a screwdriver. but in terms of how they are acquired: bought in a store or ripped off from woodshop class, they are the same
everyone knows the usa has to have the ability to turn the entire surface of the earth into a radioactive wasteland 20 times over!
we all know this is projecting weakness, and by giving up a handful of our couple thousand nukes, the usa is inviting 10 more terrorist attacks and invasion by china, obviously!
Slashdot Mirror
you compare a country to a misspelling of its name and you have the audacity to question my grasp on geography?
put another shrimp on the barbie and go watch the sound of music kid, the part where crocodile dundee teaches julie andrew's eight kids how to sing
learn something before you spout your ignorance, stupid child
austria before world war ii was known as the empire of austria-hungry
this was solved by the invasion of turkey
turkey is a delicious country, especially on thanksgiving day, which is the day turkey was able to remove the hungry part of the austro-hungryian empire
freud, schwarzenegger, mozart, schrodinger...
ok, that's respectable
respect to you australians then
but you really should stick with your native german language
He said the balloon was then seen lying partially-inflated above a paddock "like a white Uluru".
what's a paddock?
and what is with the reference to an albino version of a star trek character?
i know you australians typically speak german like your neighbors to the north, but if you are going to write a story in the american language, try to more precise
thanks
that's cold man, real cold
i have to rethink my entire worldview, my entire ideology now
thanks a lot
tens of millions of poor media hungry and technologically savvy teenagers from around the globe
versus
a couple thousand fucking lawyers
who's going to win this contest?
where the mechanic absconds with jerry's car because jerry wasn't taking good care of it?
the job of the IT admin is to do whatever the hell the OWNERS of a network decide to do with it. if the owners of a network want to give out all the user names and passwords, then that's their call. in what position do you believe the it admin is in to question that?
otherwise, you have some sort of psychotic attachment to your network, you have boundary issues, just like that psychotic mechanic in the seinfeld episode
terry childs is obviously guilty to anyone who isn't a psychotic it admin
we drain their treasury mate, we play robin hood with their booty
which one is farnsworth and which one is rca so i know who to root for?
http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae408.cfm
ip law doesn't reward inventors. ip law rewards assholes with big pockets. as this case shows, ip law is a farce, its a way for big companies to waste a lot of money on lawyer whores
if you are the little guy who thinks that copyright is for authors, and patents are for inventors, you're a fool
ip law is for distributors and large corporations. real creators are screwed. stop being naive
in the name of the highest ideals of western democracy, fuck ip law, it should be actively undermined and destroyed by anyone with morality and principles. we can't work through our governments and legislators, they're all whores to the patronage system. its up to the common man to destroy the entire rotten edifice
i'm not talking about revolution or any such nonsense. i'm talking about piracy. i'm talking about hitting them in their wallets. with any luck, we can bankrupt the organizations that profit from the idea of "intellectual property", and thereby destroy the validity of the idea itself in anyone's eyes
aarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!
so power to opera/ firefox/ safari/ chrome, whomever first stands behind a supported warrantied corporate customizable browser
probably chrome, because of the google cachet
everything we say do and think is built on the bones of our ancestors
in that respect, if you talk about anything being original, what you really mean is it "significantly expands" upon existing work
human culture science and thought are all branches on a tree. and like any tree, some tiny twigs turn into mighty trunks that in turn support their own twigs, while other twigs fail to thrive or break and fall off
the tree of memes is the same as the tree of genes: constant innovation, most of it misguided, but a spare few leading to the next big thing
nothing is ever original. all you can ever do is expand on what came before, and that is all you should ever aim to do in your life. but don't fool yourself: if it wasn't for who came before you and what they did, what you do would be impossible to do
note i am not excusing the losers who only imitate or coopt someone else's work as their own. but sometimes, good ideas are forgotten, and it takes someone to rediscover them and, on their own, discover they are important (and don't deserve to be forgotten) and to then shout about them to gain the prominence those forgotten or muted ideas deserve
and while this kind of copying is not as noble as original discovery, it is just as important and just as valid a way to contribute to the world. this applies to culture and science. is darwin less of a thinker because he reimagined and remixed the idea of evolution that was already realized but not as expounded upon by many others before him and many of his contemporaries? sometimes, who gets attributed for an idea many others have already realized is simply because they are the ones who first shouted about it the loudest, and then, because of thwm, the idea catches on like wildfire, even though they themselves weren't original in the strictest sense of the word
is gore verbinski less of a moviemaker because he reimagined the japanese "ringu" as "the ring" (which some say is superior to the original)?
is hideo nakata less of a storyteller because he only made a movie of koji suzuki's book (but he popularized it globally because he made such a scary good movie)?
and is koji suzuki just a hack writer because he took some medieval japanese folklore and a canadian film and remixed it as ringu (but of course, it was his contribution to remix like this, and add the idea of a vhs tape, modern technology, being a ghost's manifestation (which is also an idea that has also been explored by others))?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banch%C5%8D_Sarayashiki
*ring* *ring*... "seven days..."
http://www.terrortrap.com/ghostmovies/changeling/
give them a few years, they will ;-P
besides, the way the chinese focus on hacking google, it seems the chinese think google sinks something!
but even without that red herring, there's all you navy thinkers should be thinking about, china:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/world/asia/24navy.html
american navy, prepare: zheng he has come to sink you
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng_He
then power to opera/safari/chrome/firefox: the first one who tries to be corporate friendly wins a big market
however, i think firefox is pretty customizable. hell some third party could corporatize firefox all by itself
so somebody: go make some corporate cash locking down firefox for the point and click admins!
i live in midtown manhattan
how's the basement twatstain?
if you could actually control the internet
since you can't, get used to what i am talking about
because i am not trying to sell you some fantastical alternative way of doing things that only works if i convince everyone to do things my way
i'm simply describing the matter-of-fact future you need to adapt to, or die
i mean, you can't review a movie at all without giving SOMETHING away, but if you want your iron man 2 experience to be spotless, you already know not to read any reviews at all
me personally, i read lots of reviews and don't mind anything being "spoiled." in fact, many times i purposefully read the wikipedia entry for a movie to get the entire plot in my head before i see the movie. because unless you are talking about "the crying game", plot points aren't really the issue in terms of your experience being ruined. the single biggest destroyer of movie enjoyment is: expectations. movies you expect a lot from disappoint more easily. simple as that
so here goes:
!!!!!!!!
SPOILER WARNING FOR ANY SEQUEL YOU WILL EVER SEE
!!!!!!!!
1. you enjoyed the first iron man a lot,
2. so you look forward to the second iron man a lot,
3. therefore you will not be as impressed by the second iron man
with that in mind, try to enjoy iron man 2, realizing that the psychology of pleasure (anticipation more influential than delivery) means you are your own worse enemy in the entirety of your lifetime of moviegoing experiences. this lesson applies to all other experiences in your life you do for pleasure to: from going to a restaurant, to buying a car, food, to sex. there's a good reason why women tease, whether they realize it or not: the buildup of anticipation drives your pleasure more than the actual mechanical act of sex
understand psychology, master the pleasure you derive from life
let ie6 only access the intranet and the applications inside the company it is needed for
you don't even have to inspect packets for HTTP_USER_AGENT, no such filtering or gatekeeping nonsense at a network level: since you control the employee's desktop, just lock ie6 out programmatically. lock it down by subnet filter and make the property read only so savvier employees can't change it. employees get used to using two browsers: one for outside access, one for legacy apps
thus you decouple the legacy app argument from the security argument. win win. now you can keep ie6 inhouse for years if you have to. just don't let it peek outside
you're just lacking imagination
off the top of my head: in game advertisements, $ for premium or personalized content, subscriptions to online access arenas, etc
in the early 90s, id gave away its first free levels. id made millions because they hooked people on their content, then they charged for more premium content. from this ancient era of videogames, you can see free files is a superior approach, and in fact, not a very revolutionary one
the idea of giving away your product for free for great market share and capitalizing in alternative ways is a story as old as capitalism itself. trying to control that which you cannot control, the internet, emanwhile, is a loser's game, an act of insecurity that simply hurts your bottom line in the new world of media distribution
look: when lots of people consume your media, you have gained power. this power can be capitalized on in all sorts of ways. that's the beginning and the end of all you need to know about the future of media
it is to your advantage to give your media away, to maximize the mindshare, the eyeballs you have control over now. if you charge for your media meanwhile, you simply lessen the amount of copies of your media that is out there, and therefore the ancillary ways in which you can profit
welcome to the new world (not really that new)
he ignored ip law and was very successful for doing that: he succeeded on merit alone
you point out he then formed gnarls barkley and went on to even more success. this is the old model, where success is determined by getting the fickle attention of a distributor who then hypes you. danger mouse's novelty is only the unorthodox way in which he garnished attention. his story is a hybrid of the old and new model of music distribution. its a temporary phase
the future is the first part of danger mouse's story, and the second part, the amplification by old school distributors, is still going to continue (pop music will never die), but how you make money will be concert venues only. there's still plenty of money there, no need to (mpossibly) control the internet to make money off of media files. in fact, it is superior to give otu the files for free: they are just advertising for your concert gigs: what consumer wants to buy advertising?
"Discarding it for nothing is short sighted at best, and at worst exploitive of artists."
this is absolutely hilarious because the pre-internet model of music distribution is one giant litany of artist explotation. no barrier between consumer and artist, ie, distribution via the internet, is the most artist-empowering reveletation possible
you, like many people, are confusing the death of the middle man with the death of the artist, for some erroneous reason
thank you vely much fol the stlategy bliefing
roose rips sink ships
and it isn't really that revolutionary: its the same business model as broadcast television or radio
content is free, and money is made via ancillary revenue streams. you give your music or movies away for free on the internet and you make cash from the people who show up at concert gigs (because they like your music: your mp3 files are merely advertising) or in the cinema house (the internet, like television and the vcr before it, despite all the panic, is not going to kill the cinema house)
furthermore, this "radical" future is not the death of capitalism, it is the ultimate expression of capitalism: the marketplace, the internet, is a great equalizer. quality and quality alone becomes the dominant determinant about who triumphs and who has to keep their day job. the only people who suffer are the old media companies from the previous, now dead, era of vinyl and cellulose: they aren't needed anymore
and don't believe their lies: when such dying distributors whine about capitalism, they actually are talking about corporatism. corporatism is a greater enemy of capitalism than communism or socialism ever can be, and this is also historically true: oligopolies and monopolies using their size and influence over legislators to warp and destroy the free market to their advantage. so if you are interested in a free market, a marketplace of competing equals, you are interested in strong government regulations which curtail the influence of the dominant players
but this simple truth is unfortunately contrary to so much libertarian and tea party rhetoric
on the topic of foss, and also on many other topical issues, too many people confuse the idea of capitalism and corporatism
too many people unfortunately buy the self-serving rhetoric and the propaganda and the alligator tears of the 800 pound gorillas in the room who say they are on the side of capitalism, but who are not interested in true capitalism at all, they are in corporatism. they are interested in destroying the free market to their advantage by doing away with regulations or flat out rewriting the regulations to grandfather themselves into dominant positions in the marketplace
are you a libertarian? are you a free market fundamentalist? are you a tea party member? then recognize this: your greatest enemy is not the government, it is large corporations. they will destroy the free market UNLESS the government is strong enough to check their power so the little guys can compete equally. the government is the enemy ONLY to the extent that large corporations have corrupted it. so fight to CHANGE the government, not destroy it, for that is far worse in the name of YOUR ideals. IN THE NAME OF THE FREE MARKET, you want and need a strong regulatory government. this really is 100% the truth. a truly free market functions only amongst equals. and since in a marketplace no one stays equal very long, you must have strong regulations to make sure the larger players don't take advantage of the smaller players. there's simply no way around that
so in the name of true capitalism, defy the mpaa and riaa. monopolies and oligopolies are the greatest threat to capitalism, ever
the differences you cite aren't really differences. everything is a means to an end, including music and movies: pleasure. "You install it because you want to do something with it" applies to linux. it also applies to "iron man" and beyonce
put it this way: a hammer is not a screwdriver. but in terms of how they are acquired: bought in a store or ripped off from woodshop class, they are the same
the death of the power of organized religions: the free flow of information
yes: what the internet represents is the end of power structures predicated on hocus pocus
at least he knows his enemy
everyone knows the usa has to have the ability to turn the entire surface of the earth into a radioactive wasteland 20 times over!
we all know this is projecting weakness, and by giving up a handful of our couple thousand nukes, the usa is inviting 10 more terrorist attacks and invasion by china, obviously!
</sarcasm>
it's sad, but some people really believe this
the more the people, the more useful the network. the less the people, the less useful the network
the best you can do is ride a newish network to popularity. then hop off before it goes out style. then another network rises
friendster, mypsace, facebook... next is?